Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"
Sec. 1. RCW 9A.56.360 and 2013 c 153 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A person commits retail theft with special circumstances if he or she commits theft of property from a mercantile establishment with one of the following special circumstances:
(a) To facilitate the theft, the person leaves the mercantile establishment through a designated emergency exit;
(b) The person was, at the time of the theft, in possession of an item, article, implement, or device used, under circumstances evincing an intent to use or employ, or designed to overcome security systems including, but not limited to, lined bags or tag removers; or
(c) The person committed theft at three or more separate and distinct mercantile establishments within a one hundred eighty-day period.
(2) A person is guilty of retail theft with special circumstances in the first degree if the theft involved constitutes theft in the first degree. Retail theft with special circumstances in the first degree is a class B felony.
(3) A person is guilty of retail theft with special circumstances in the second degree if the theft involved constitutes theft in the second degree. Retail theft with special circumstances in the second degree is a class C felony.
(4) A person is guilty of retail theft with special circumstances in the third degree if the theft involved constitutes theft in the third degree. Retail theft with special circumstances in the third degree is a class C felony.
(5) For the purposes of this section, "special circumstances" means the particular aggravating circumstances described in subsection (1)(a) through (c) of this section.
(6)(a) A series of thefts committed by the same person from one or more mercantile establishments over a period of one hundred eighty days may be aggregated in one count and the sum of the value of all the property shall be the value considered in determining the degree of the retail theft with special circumstances involved. Thefts committed by the same person in different counties that have been aggregated in one county may be prosecuted in any county in which any one of the thefts occurred. In no case may an aggregated series of thefts, or a single theft that has been aggregated in one county, be prosecuted in more than one county.
(b) The mercantile establishment or establishments whose property is alleged to have been stolen may request that the charge be aggregated with other thefts of property about which the mercantile establishment or establishments is aware. In the event a request to aggregate the prosecution is declined, the mercantile establishment or establishments shall be promptly advised by the prosecuting jurisdiction making the decision to decline aggregating the prosecution of the decision and the reasons for the decision."